Tim Jones wrote:
Does anyone have any feedback after looking at the code I submitted for
sorting results?  Doug and Erik - do you see this as a good way to go, or do
you have other ideas in mind?  For example, what about creating a special
kind of "SortingField"?

I like the implementation, requiring an indexed field, but recommending against storing or tokenizing. Most other folks (including myself) who've done this use a stored field and then iterate over documents to fill the cache. Instead you're able to fill the cache with a TermDocs, which is much more efficient. Good idea!


That said, I've not had a chance to test the code. But if someone tests it, and it works well, I see no reason not to include it.

We might rename it something like IntegerSortedSearcher and also add classes called FloatSortedSearcher, StringSortedSearcher, etc. These could all build on a base class, AbstractSortedSearcher.

Doug


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to